Results 1 to 38 of 38

Thread: Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.

  1. #1
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143

    Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.

    Dear God, Hillary Clinton. Please, Just Go.
    Liz Mair
    10.18.18 5:20 AM ET
    thedailybeast.com

    We’re three weeks out from the 2018 midterm election, and Hillary Clinton is popping up again like a Halloween ghoul who keeps rising from the grave to terrorize the American public; only this time accompanied by the increasingly #MeToo burdened uber-villain, Bubba.

    The Clintons, it seems, can’t seem to call it quits, even if it means leaving members of their own party cringing and many more voters ready to “headdesk” themselves into a coma.

    This time, it’s happening courtesy of a pay-through-the-nose-to-see-them rehab tour. Because if there’s one thing America hasn’t had enough of over recent decades, it’s efforts by the Clintons to recast themselves as normal, likeable people, as they cash checks and play the victim.

    Previous editions of this show have included Hillary’s two Senate runs and two presidential runs, which, depending on one’s perspective, were either an attempt to show independence from her husband or to be compensated for his myriad screw ups.

    But despite the last run ending with a loss to Donald Freaking Trump, the most flawed candidate Republicans could conceivably have run in 2016, it appears that nothing will get Hillary out of our political debate once and for all.

    Hillary remains caught up in the delusion that the only reason she lost in 2016 was because of Russian interference. She does not seem to have fully processed the fact that she lost the electoral college, the only vote that counts. She touts the fact that she got nearly three million more votes than Trump while conveniently leaving out that her tally of the vote still fell well below 50 percent.

    Both of the major party nominees in 2016 were so unlikable, flawed and—let’s be candid—unethical that lots of us just couldn’t pull the lever for her even if we couldn’t stand Trump. According to a study from American National Election Studies, the words most associated by voters with Hillary in 2016 were “experienced liar.” Is it logical that she’d want to rehab her image, given all this? Perhaps. Is it possible? No. Do we need to watch her try? Definitely, definitely, definitely not.


    Related in Politics

    That might be especially the case if you’re a Democrat.

    Hillary’s continual pursuit of limelight and headlines ensures that the image of the Democratic Party remains an outdated, outmoded, and frankly despicable for far too many voters. This comes at a time when leading Democrats are attempting to focus voters’ attention on the future—2020, and beating Trump—and jostling for the role as the new party leader.

    It also undercuts Democrats’ positioning as the only party that really cares about #MeToo and that will fight for survivors, a contrast Dems are only too keen to spotlight in the wake of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court and ongoing allegations about President Trump’s treatment of women. Only sheer partisan convenience could allow someone to insist that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony is credible while downplaying the numerous allegations of mistreatment (and worse) made by women against Bill Clinton.

    For the Democratic Party, about the best that can come of this latest Clinton revival is that no matter how unpalatable any of its leading lights—Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Sen. Cory Booker, or others—are individually, they’ll look like downright appealing the longer Hillary hangs about.

    But her doing so does not signal that the Democratic Party is actually living in the present, and focused on beating Trump. Rather, it suggests the party wants to turn American politics into the new edition of Groundhog Day—only with no Bill Murray or actual groundhog. Isn’t it time to let the Democratic Party move on from its Clintonite past, and to give someone else a go?

    One of the reasons Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been so refreshing isn’t just because the more Democratic Socialist-driven, modern Democratic Party—which is populated to a greater degree by younger voters—wants a younger, more progressive avatar to embrace. It’s also because even Republicans are starting to get weary of bashing the Clintons now; though some of us will undertake it still as a public service.

    Clinton is like the target you’ve already shot dead-on so many times the paper has gone to shreds. There are few more column inches to be written, but even Fox News personalities have begun to act a little bored when they dive into Hillary-focused narratives these days.

    “For Republicans, too, it’s time to move on—to fresh fights, with fresh adversaries. We want the newest bad guy, not the evildoer from the biggest show in the freaking 1990s.”
    All of which suggests that for Republicans, too, it’s time to move on—to fresh fights, with fresh adversaries. We want the newest bad guy, not the evildoer from the biggest show in the freaking 1990s. Maybe in 2020 that will be Warren, Gillibrand, Harris, or Booker, or any one of the other 20-some people that might potentially run for president on the Democratic side. But it’s a dead certainty that it isn’t the lady we’ve seen inveighing against the right wing for stealing things she seems to think she or her husband are inherently entitled to for decades now.

    It’s time for Hillary and Bill to get off the stage and quit seeking the public adoration they’re clearly never going to get to the massive degree they crave it. Be content, like so many other party elders who turned out not to be winners, in working behind the scenes to help to deliver wins for other, better, up-and-coming, appealing voices.

    Yes, others have stuck around past their primes. Mitt Romney, a candidate with a similar resume of high profile presidential losses, is now running for Senate. But his circumstances are different. He was asked to run for the seat that he will soon occupy by its current occupant and he’s maintained strong ties to Utah. Even then, his continuing presence on the political stage irks a ton of Americans who wish he too would go away quietly.

    So, Hillary, ditch the rehab tour. Dispense with TV appearances. Recognize that whether it’s lauded or not, you did make some kind of a difference (yes, even Hillary did a couple of things right in her various terms in public office), and be content to leave it there.

    Zombie movies for Halloween are fun. But whether you’re a Democrat, a Republican, or neither, there’s only so much zombie politics you can take. That’s what the Clintons essentially offer now—a brain-devouring, egocentric version of Democrat-ism lurching and festering onward, seemingly endlessly.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  2. #2
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Oh PLUUUUEEEEEEEEZE.

    This isn't solely on Hilary but I have a suspicion that bald "horse-faced" goat fucker Perez is behind this who thinks Taylor Swift is going to blow him any second now. Like I said, the Democrats need to rid themselves of this shit, place Hilary in a nursing home, Bill on a sexual predator watch list and move the fuck on. They will fuck things up more than any one of you Bernie brats ever could - and who thought that was possible?
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  3. #3
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143
    They already HAVE fucked up this party. The massive losses in the mid term elections of 1994, 2010, 2014, and Hillary's clusterfuck in 2016 are evidence of this.

    Bill Clinton won a three way race with 43% of the vote in 1992, and beat a feeble old man as an incumbent in 1996. These fake "Democrats" have deluded themselves into thinking those were great victories and have been hanging onto the Clinton cult ever since, despite losing control of both houses of Congress, more than 1000 elected seats overall, and most embarrassingly, the White House to a living cartoon character in 2016.

    The rank and file Democrats - and yes I still consider myself one, despite my lack of use for the national party administration - are well beyond the Clinton cult mentality. And the Clintons know it. That's why they pulled the last minute scam to get SHAFTA Tommy installed as DNC chair, even though the majority of Democrats were supporting Keith Ellison. Scamela Harris & Borey Crooker aren't really any better than Hillary, but they are sure trying to LOOK like they are, and hope they can win the nomination in 2020. Why not? It worked for Barry Obama in 2008. He campaigned as if he were another FDR, and sadly turned out to be Clinton with a little extra melanin in his skin.

    Anybody who is sane would certainly hope 2020 doesn't turn out to be another case of "meet the new boss.... same as the old boss".


  4. #4
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Obama didn't defer to the Clintons in 2008. That was part of his appeal. To be fair, in terms of straight-up primary votes, Hillary ran a competitive primary race in 2008. It's one thing to lose against Obama, and quite another to have difficulties putting Sanders away in the 2016 primaries, and then going on to lose to Trump even though more people voted for you. Sort of like Gore 2000 all over again: even when Democrats get more votes, they still somehow find away to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Obama tipping his hands on the scale re: Hillary's 2016 nomination was easily one of the larger mistakes he made during his 2 terms.

    I wanted to like her. Throughout the years leading up to and including the 2016 campaign, I really tried to find reasons to like her. Even now - even after 2016 - I like her slightly more than I ever did her husband, who I considered a great retail campaigner able to give decent (not great) campaign speeches, but a mealy-mouthed, unprincipled, spineless President. But that isn't saying much. And in the wake of 2016, she trots out ANOTHER book where she claimed "this time I'm going to lay it all on the line and tell it straight"...for $29.95. She did come to a realization, however late, that she was disliked much more than she had previously imagined. She was tone deaf as to why: with the Clintons, it's always everyone else's fault if they don't like them, never having any relation to what the Clintons themselves have done.

    And they WON'T go away. Because there's always the next cash grab to fill the coffers. Always with their outstretched hands asking for more money. Neither of them have anything left to offer, except for a nostalgia trip: remember 1992? THAT was a good year. With no mention of the income stratification that continued under Bill's 2 terms, or the gutting of welfare, or the failure to lead in terms of nuclear disarmament. Or the massive business deregulation under Bill's 2 terms. Or the lack of anything meaningful Hillary achieved in her time as a Senator or as Sec of State (unless one counts her Iraq vote and her Lybian adventure as endeavors reeking of success).

    A pair of DINO centrists. All either of them have ever been. Honestly, when one thinks about Bill Clinton's lasting accomplishments as President, he sounds more like a Republican. And Hillary has no definable political core at all, other than fence-sitting.

    Booker and Harris? Don't think so. Ditto to Gillibrand. Warren is past it. Biden...I like Joe Biden, but I think he was probably past it even in 2008, never mind two years from now.

    Barring a fucked-up war or a major recession, Trump gets re-elected two years from now. Unless [Trump] is removed from office prior to then. The chances of that happening, even if the Dems retook the House AND managed to win a slim majority in the Senate? Well, not knowing what Mueller has as of yet, I wouldn't say it is impossible, but I wouldn't wager any serious money on it.

    I WOULD be willing to wager the Democratic Party isn't going to revitalize itself until it breaks the endless cycle of Clinton enabling, stops being inaccurately wistful about the 1990s and starts looking forward to the future (hint: the future DOESN'T include elected office for Chelsea).
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  5. 3 users say thank you to Terry for this KICKASS post:

    FORD (10-19-2018),Nickdfresh (10-18-2018),ZahZoo (10-19-2018)


  6. #5
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Hillary still thinks she can win in 2020. The bitch is mad as a shit house rat but I will give her credit on one thing. She never gives up. What's funny is Hillary had all this money in the Clinton Foundation and the Democrat Party was broke. Hillary bought the Democrat Party threw Bernie under the bus and still couldn't win the presidency.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  7. #6
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    Hillary still thinks she can win in 2020. The bitch is mad as a shit house rat but I will give her credit on one thing. She never gives up. What's funny is Hillary had all this money in the Clinton Foundation and the Democrat Party was broke. Hillary bought the Democrat Party threw Bernie under the bus and still couldn't win the presidency.
    She outspent Trump 2:1 and still couldn't win.

    Some of the groundwork lay in the Obama's political braintrust not really mobilizing/organizing that amazing grass roots fundraising of 2008 into a network that could be used for things other than getting Obama elected. All of that was left to wither away in the years subsequent to 2008, as was the national Democratic Party structure. I tend to agree with Hillary that by the time 2015/early 2016 rolled around, the DNC was lacking financial resources. More critically, the DNC was lacking intellectual resources, and there was never a comprehensive fusion between the candidate and the party apparatus. Not helpful when it came to mobilizing GOTV efforts in various states, because the party infrastructure was lacking in direction. You had people in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan who WANTED to start the GOTV efforts for Hillary as soon as it became apparent she would be the nominee. All they got from Hillary's Campaign, instead of funding and support, was silence. By the time Hillary's campaign realized they should have been utilizing these on the ground people in these states and tried to jump-start efforts late in the campaign, it was too late. But that's the whole point: it SHOULDN'T have been left to that late. And it was Election 101 stuff.

    Her campaign's problem was they left it too much up to analytics, where the statistics they believed in stated she would in all likelihood win. So, the groupthink was that they didn't NEED to do the work in Michigan...even AFTER Sanders won the primary there. Because they were too busy feeding the media talking points like how Hillary was competitive in Texas. And any other number of red states that haven't went for a Democrat in ages, but said states were where she had racked up easy victories against Sanders in the primaries.

    Nobody believed Trump could win, but it was as if they were taking no notice as to the size, fervor and frequency of Trump's rallies. Meanwhile, Hillary couldn't be bothered to campaign hard (and this was well before her bout with pneumonia): she simply didn't work for it as hard as Trump did. She didn't work the retail end of it as hard as Trump did, and she certainly didn't work the press end of it as hard as Trump did. Aloof by comparison.

    So, she wasn't an effective retail campaigner, didn't have good relations with the media, didn't like sitting down for interviews, couldn't deliver inspiring speeches...why exactly was she the nominee again? The notion was her actually winning the election would be tough, but once she got into office she would be a good president. However, that rationale was never supported by the decisions she made when she had held elected/appointed office previously. Nor in the 1990s when she was appointed as the Spouse In Chief Health Care Czar.

    Previously, she won election to the Senate via a virtual coronation. When she had to run a competitive race in 2008, she lost. She struggled in another competitive race in the 2016 primaries against a self-proclaimed socialist nobody had ever heard of prior to 2015. And she lost later in 2016 to a man who said 8 million wacked out things on the campaign trail, any one of which would have felled anybody else in any other year. Trump had the fortune to be running against somebody voters disliked only slightly less than himself.

    She was never a good candidate. Never. While she and her campaign staff may have been unable to see that, it was the job of the DNC and Obama as the functional head of the party to take a hard, cold look at the facts.

    While I'm not 100% sure if Sanders would have won the general had he been the nominee - Hillary may well have been the party's best shot in 2016, and what does that say about the party if true? - it wasn't the job of the DNC to function as a conduit to circumvent access by the Sanders campaign to the party resources.

  8. #7
    Talks To Trees
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    ZahZoo's Avatar
    Member No
    61
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-24-2024 @ 09:14 AM
    Location
    3rd Stone From The Sun
    Posts
    8,944
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,484
    Thanked 3,081 Times in 1,997 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10
    The one benefit of Hillary's tenacity is it's sustaining keeping the the undesirable people at the top of the Democratic party's mess from gaining any political traction among rank and file Democrats. If you keep enough shit stirred no one rises to the top. I'm sure there's some great leaders within the ranks... but until the party can get the current pack of top swamp rats off their thrones the party will continue to lose...
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  9. #8
    Kill A Commie For Mommy
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Kristy's Avatar
    Member No
    7609
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    Denver, Colo
    Posts
    16,290
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 2,750 Times in 2,061 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    Hillary still thinks she can win in 2020.

    Is this what your "MBA" (or the voices in your head) is telling you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    The bitch is mad as a shit house rat but I will give her credit on one thing. She never gives up. What's funny is Hillary had all this money in the Clinton Foundation and the Democrat Party was broke. Hillary bought the Democrat Party threw Bernie under the bus and still couldn't win the presidency.
    Yeah, if she only could afford a phone call to Putin.

  10. #9
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    The one benefit of Hillary's tenacity is it's sustaining keeping the the undesirable people at the top of the Democratic party's mess from gaining any political traction among rank and file Democrats. If you keep enough shit stirred no one rises to the top. I'm sure there's some great leaders within the ranks... but until the party can get the current pack of top swamp rats off their thrones the party will continue to lose...
    The Pelosi/Schumer center of control, inasmuch as there is an actual degree of control, will have its test in a couple of weeks. The results will be easily evident.

    If the results aren't at a minimum the control of the House, the Party (such as it is) may want to do a bit more than some mild recalibrating prior to 2020 re: the current leaders within that the Party are taking their cues from.

    Sanders should have been a wakeup call.

  11. Thanked Terry for this KICKASS post:

    ZahZoo (10-21-2018)


  12. #10
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143
    Should Democrats regain the House, I wouldn't be so sure that Jellyfish Pelosi automatically gets the Speaker seat back. Unfortunately, some of her potential replacements could be even worse. Steny Whore definitely would be. The best choice of anybody with a credible shot at House leadership (since they do go on a "seniority" basis) would be Barbara Lee. Unlike Pelosi and so many other so-called "Democrats" in the house, she's been consistent with actual Democratic values over the years, even taking a stand against the BCE's post 9/11 agenda (illegal wars/patriot act/etc.)

    In the slim chance that they take the Senate, I doubt anybody would challenge Cuck Schumer, but I wish they would. If Bernie decides not to run in 2020, he would be perfect for Senate Majority Leader. Because unlike Schumer (or Spineless Harry before him) Bernie would take the words "Majority" and "Leader" seriously.

  13. #11
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    Seshmeister's Avatar
    Member No
    11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:43 AM
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    35,078
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,815
    Thanked 9,347 Times in 6,031 Posts


    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by FORD View Post
    If Bernie decides not to run in 2020, he would be perfect for Senate Majority Leader. Because unlike Schumer (or Spineless Harry before him) Bernie would take the words "Majority" and "Leader" seriously.
    If he won in 2020 He would be 83 at the end of his presidency.

    WTF?
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  14. #12
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Seshmeister View Post
    If he won in 2020 He would be 83 at the end of his presidency.

    WTF?
    Sanders running in 2020 is a nice thought.

    Even if 2016 hadn't been rigged for Hillary re: the nomination, I still tend to think she would have squeaked out a win over Sanders. It's an uphill battle for people like Sanders or Ellison to seize control of the Party apparatus without a massive voter groundswell (as opposed to merely a very vocal minority) propelling them into a position where they could seize control.

    There are simply too many corporate centrists in the donor class who are happy to enjoy Trump's tax cuts AND also happy to promote social equality among the working classes because these donors don't actually live and work among the working classes, but rather in upper class white enclaves. If it came down to a choice between Trump tax cuts and a truly progressive taxation instituted by a Sanders-controlled Democratic Party, these corporate centrist donors would pull a lever for Trump. For, while these donor centrists will read the NYT editorial page over a cup of Starbucks coffee and decry how Trump approaches illegal immigrants and the like, when the rubber meets the road and the prospect of their own wallets being substantially lightened via progressive taxation is a prospective reality, said centrists will suddenly become just as Calvinist or fiscally conservative as Grover Norquist.

  15. #13
    Talks To Trees
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    ZahZoo's Avatar
    Member No
    61
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-24-2024 @ 09:14 AM
    Location
    3rd Stone From The Sun
    Posts
    8,944
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,484
    Thanked 3,081 Times in 1,997 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    The Pelosi/Schumer center of control, inasmuch as there is an actual degree of control, will have its test in a couple of weeks. The results will be easily evident.

    If the results aren't at a minimum the control of the House, the Party (such as it is) may want to do a bit more than some mild recalibrating prior to 2020 re: the current leaders within that the Party are taking their cues from.

    Sanders should have been a wakeup call.
    That's a key point on the Pelosi/Schumer angle. They are not helping unify the party any more than Clinton/Obama adding a hand are bringing a center of control into clearer view. It's all muddying the murky water and making it worse.

    I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

    In addition, gauging any candidate's ability to win votes based on money raised is no longer a meaningful measurement by a long shot. Trump's campaign proved that miserably. I'd love to see an actual statistic of how much money was just outright thrown down the drain and utterly wasted on all the losing campaigns from 2016... I suspect it's well up over a billion... I think it would be a real eye opener, especially when people realize that their money could have been spent on something far more productive that may actually improved real life...

  16. 2 users say thank you to ZahZoo for this KICKASS post:

    Nitro Express (10-22-2018),Terry (10-21-2018)


  17. #14
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    That's a key point on the Pelosi/Schumer angle. They are not helping unify the party any more than Clinton/Obama adding a hand are bringing a center of control into clearer view. It's all muddying the murky water and making it worse.

    I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

    In addition, gauging any candidate's ability to win votes based on money raised is no longer a meaningful measurement by a long shot. Trump's campaign proved that miserably. I'd love to see an actual statistic of how much money was just outright thrown down the drain and utterly wasted on all the losing campaigns from 2016... I suspect it's well up over a billion... I think it would be a real eye opener, especially when people realize that their money could have been spent on something far more productive that may actually improved real life...

    There's a wistful nostalgia about Obama, but perhaps more of this has to do with his individual temperament and graciousness as compared to Trump than his political skills. When you look at the Democratic Party's performance under both of Obama's terms - even from strictly a standpoint of getting Democrats elected in national, state and local races - the results were pretty dismal. By 2016, Obama's support wasn't even strong enough to get Clinton enough votes in the places it ended up mattering to enable her to clear the hurdle.

    Pelosi has an appeal in terms of her history of fundraising. Yet, as you say, look at the history of the Democratic Party since she in effect took it over on a Congressional level in 2006: all that fundraising ability hasn't amounted to much when contrasted against the elective gains of the Republican Party over the same period. Look where the Democratic agenda is today as opposed to where it was in 2006 when the likes of Schumer and Pelosi got control of it. Look where Pelosi and Schumer come from: are a couple of aged coastal limousine liberal elites who have been in lockstep with Clintonian Centrism from the start really going to be able to understand the tenor and tone of the condescendingly titled "flyover states" much less adapt to where the nation is now vs. 1996 in terms of the Democratic Party actually making gains in Red States?

    Unlike Trump or Sanders, the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker are only useful in bringing out Democrats who were likely to vote anyway regardless of who the chosen party candidate was. Trump and Sanders mobilized a lot of people who likely wouldn't vote for a typical, run-of-the-mill candidate. When you look at the percentage of eligible voters out there who don't vote in election after election...there's a heckuva lot of 'em out there.

    I'd have to think anybody would be skeptical about the poll results after 2016. Not necessarily in terms of such polls being "fake news" in terms of being outright fabricated by those taking the polls, but just the polls themselves being incorrect due to flawed or - as you say - outdated/"traditional" models. Polling data assumes people are giving honest answers to poll questions. The only polls that matter are in the form of votes on Election Day. I wouldn't put money on the Democrats taking back the House.

  18. #15
    Talks To Trees
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    ZahZoo's Avatar
    Member No
    61
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-24-2024 @ 09:14 AM
    Location
    3rd Stone From The Sun
    Posts
    8,944
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,484
    Thanked 3,081 Times in 1,997 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10
    Part of where the Democrats are failing and where it matters are the same "fly-over" states blamed for getting Trump elected, that hold a lot of rank & file Democrats, but they are written off and assumed not numerous enough when compared to the packed population centers on the coasts. Several of my Democrat friends are completely repulsed by the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker...

    Minorities are also shifting away from the Democratic strongholds as well... too many times they have been portrayed as the "cause" Democrats are fighting for only to be ignored and left empty-handed once election day passes. Trump's "what have you got to lose..?" campaign approach is paying off in the jobs and economy 10 fold. What do Democrats offer... roll back the Trumps taxes and reinstate the job killing regulatory measures... who's gonna seriously buy into that crap..?

    Polling used to be fairly decent in predictive measures when it was land-line based and certain geographic centers were reliable predictive elements. Now with land-line usage dropping drastically and massive population shifts, the only place to go is the internet. This weighs poorly due to trolling and social media flies that flock to the smelliest pile shit presented to them... Flies don't show up on voting day...

  19. #16
    Lick me
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    Terry's Avatar
    Member No
    181
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Location
    USA! USA! USA!
    Posts
    11,902
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,579
    Thanked 2,267 Times in 1,488 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    Part of where the Democrats are failing and where it matters are the same "fly-over" states blamed for getting Trump elected, that hold a lot of rank & file Democrats, but they are written off and assumed not numerous enough when compared to the packed population centers on the coasts. Several of my Democrat friends are completely repulsed by the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker...

    Minorities are also shifting away from the Democratic strongholds as well... too many times they have been portrayed as the "cause" Democrats are fighting for only to be ignored and left empty-handed once election day passes. Trump's "what have you got to lose..?" campaign approach is paying off in the jobs and economy 10 fold. What do Democrats offer... roll back the Trumps taxes and reinstate the job killing regulatory measures... who's gonna seriously buy into that crap..?

    Polling used to be fairly decent in predictive measures when it was land-line based and certain geographic centers were reliable predictive elements. Now with land-line usage dropping drastically and massive population shifts, the only place to go is the internet. This weighs poorly due to trolling and social media flies that flock to the smelliest pile shit presented to them... Flies don't show up on voting day...
    The Democratic Party grand strategy seems to be the rationale that eventually non-whites will outnumber whites, thus in the long run ensuring perpetual victory for the party when that demographic shift comes to fruition.

    This assumes that non-whites are bloc voting groups that by default will be Democrats. That such factions as the Latino vote are monolithic. Or that the Women's Vote would by default ensure a female candidate would prevail in a Presidential election.

    It is a mistaken long range strategy to pursue. In part because such factions aren't necessarily monolithic. Also in part because the Democratic Party has either acquiesced nearly every step of the way in terms of tax cuts for those who didn't need them, or been powerless to prevent those cuts (both of which amount to the same thing in terms of the net result). Working class people know this by the very lives they lead and the experiences they have had. They have gained this knowledge in the most direct and practical way imaginable, and they rightfully disregard nuanced arguments to the contrary offered in publications such as The New Yorker as the bullshit that they are.

    Sadly, in terms of social media trolling, the Democratic Party is trying to grease all the squeaky wheels instead of laying out what they stand for economically. The Democratic Party now is far more concerned with appearing to be on the right side of social issues than actually winning elections.

    I have as yet to hear any sort of Moon Shot jobs plan from either party. Or any bold measures which address the rapidly aging Baby Boomer population and what is going to happen to these people (and there are a fucking LOT of them) when their retirement money runs out. Or why we need to keep putting trillions into upgrading nuclear arsenals everyone agrees should never be used.

    One thing I thought MIGHT happen under Trump is a Grand Plan along those lines. If only because he wasn't a typical politician, and the manner he won meant he wasn't beholden to either of the parties. He seemed just crazy enough to actually attempt to institute a Trillion Dollar Infrastructure plan. Could have provided a lot of jobs fixing things that need to be fixed. Nope.

  20. #17
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    The Democratic Party grand strategy seems to be the rationale that eventually non-whites will outnumber whites, thus in the long run ensuring perpetual victory for the party when that demographic shift comes to fruition.

    This assumes that non-whites are bloc voting groups that by default will be Democrats. That such factions as the Latino vote are monolithic. Or that the Women's Vote would by default ensure a female candidate would prevail in a Presidential election.....
    It may seem that way with a often inept leadership in the party, but they are making inroads with the educated white suburban voters that used to often default to the GOP. This shift is becoming more pronounced in places like Virginia, where counties are flipping Blue with middle and upper class whites moving in, and it's frustrating the blatantly obvious white gerrymandering that is the main reason the Republicans are competitive at all nationally (along with the Electoral College). The Republicans are by no means the universal party of white people since they only really seem to represent the interests of about the top 10% of (mostly) whites..

    I mean, why in the world are any white women not fat and ugly and over 50 (not named Rosanne) be voting Republican anymore other than if they're wealthy? The message they must get is, "we're gonna grab your pussy and you gonna' get raped! But you have to keep the baby! Boys rule girls drool!" I think the GOP becoming a minority party is fairly inevitable, and a lot of it has to do with their "RHINO"nonsense that began in the 1980's seemingly, where the party turned into a Stalinist-like-ideological-purity-fuckfest that has alienated a lot of socially liberal yet inherently fiscally conservative people....
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 10-21-2018 at 08:30 PM.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  21. #18
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    ...

    I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

    ...
    But it wasn't "dead wrong". That's sort of a self-serving revisionist myth. Several did predict Trump would win and the Comey (we're reopening the Clinton email investigation) last minute October surprise turned things on their head. The polls had the race fairly tight, but most seemed to default to Clinton, but you can't say things were completely wrong by any means. And really, the polls only were really off in a few key areas such as in Michigan. Clinton still won the popular vote with a substantial margin. And polls also have to contend with the "asshole money" that we call the Electoral College which makes things complicated and ridiculous, frankly...
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 10-21-2018 at 08:36 PM.

  22. Thanked Nickdfresh for this KICKASS post:

    Seshmeister (10-22-2018)


  23. #19
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    Part of where the Democrats are failing and where it matters are the same "fly-over" states blamed for getting Trump elected, that hold a lot of rank & file Democrats, but they are written off and assumed not numerous enough when compared to the packed population centers on the coasts. Several of my Democrat friends are completely repulsed by the likes of Pelosi, Schumer, Gillibrand and Booker...

    Minorities are also shifting away from the Democratic strongholds as well... too many times they have been portrayed as the "cause" Democrats are fighting for only to be ignored and left empty-handed once election day passes. Trump's "what have you got to lose..?" campaign approach is paying off in the jobs and economy 10 fold. What do Democrats offer... roll back the Trumps taxes and reinstate the job killing regulatory measures... who's gonna seriously buy into that crap..?

    Polling used to be fairly decent in predictive measures when it was land-line based and certain geographic centers were reliable predictive elements. Now with land-line usage dropping drastically and massive population shifts, the only place to go is the internet. This weighs poorly due to trolling and social media flies that flock to the smelliest pile shit presented to them... Flies don't show up on voting day...
    It was hard enough in the days of landlines and face to face interviews to get good sampling. Who you survey, where you survey, who asks the questions, what questions are asked, how many questions are asked and a lot more variables affect the accuracy of the sample Add in all the online junk like you mentioned and that makes it even harder.

    Good points on the Democrat Party. It can be summed up they have moved too far left for the working class to support them. It used to be the working class thought the Democrats had their back but now they no longer think that way. Also there is no real serious leadership in the party and there needs to be a long-term plan. Hating Trump is not a plan.

  24. #20
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by ZahZoo View Post
    That's a key point on the Pelosi/Schumer angle. They are not helping unify the party any more than Clinton/Obama adding a hand are bringing a center of control into clearer view. It's all muddying the murky water and making it worse.

    I'm also very skeptical with putting much faith in polling results after a lot of the 2016 polling was dead wrong. Technology has fragmented traditional polling to the point where it's no longer a viable gauge of results.

    In addition, gauging any candidate's ability to win votes based on money raised is no longer a meaningful measurement by a long shot. Trump's campaign proved that miserably. I'd love to see an actual statistic of how much money was just outright thrown down the drain and utterly wasted on all the losing campaigns from 2016... I suspect it's well up over a billion... I think it would be a real eye opener, especially when people realize that their money could have been spent on something far more productive that may actually improved real life...
    Hillary had over a billion to spend. Trump spent very little money in comparison and won. Hillary was spending a ton of money on television adds. Trump was using Twitter to great affect. So yup. Trump proved you don't need two billion dollars to win. Bernie Sanders did well with grass roots donations as well and who knows, he might have won the presidency if the Democrat Party didn't throw him under the bus by using their super delegates. That proved there is no democracy in the Democrat Party and that's another reason people don't trust the Democrats. Not that the Republicans are any angels.

  25. #21
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by FORD View Post
    Should Democrats regain the House, I wouldn't be so sure that Jellyfish Pelosi automatically gets the Speaker seat back. Unfortunately, some of her potential replacements could be even worse. Steny Whore definitely would be. The best choice of anybody with a credible shot at House leadership (since they do go on a "seniority" basis) would be Barbara Lee. Unlike Pelosi and so many other so-called "Democrats" in the house, she's been consistent with actual Democratic values over the years, even taking a stand against the BCE's post 9/11 agenda (illegal wars/patriot act/etc.)

    In the slim chance that they take the Senate, I doubt anybody would challenge Cuck Schumer, but I wish they would. If Bernie decides not to run in 2020, he would be perfect for Senate Majority Leader. Because unlike Schumer (or Spineless Harry before him) Bernie would take the words "Majority" and "Leader" seriously.
    I think Nancy has dementia. There really should be an age cap on who serves in public office. They don't let commercial pilots fly past age 65 yet you can serve in public office wearing Depends with half your marbles gone.

  26. #22
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    People vote their pocketbook. That comes before issues.

  27. #23
    Talks To Trees
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    ZahZoo's Avatar
    Member No
    61
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-24-2024 @ 09:14 AM
    Location
    3rd Stone From The Sun
    Posts
    8,944
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,484
    Thanked 3,081 Times in 1,997 Posts


    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    But it wasn't "dead wrong". That's sort of a self-serving revisionist myth. Several did predict Trump would win and the Comey (we're reopening the Clinton email investigation) last minute October surprise turned things on their head. The polls had the race fairly tight, but most seemed to default to Clinton, but you can't say things were completely wrong by any means. And really, the polls only were really off in a few key areas such as in Michigan. Clinton still won the popular vote with a substantial margin. And polls also have to contend with the "asshole money" that we call the Electoral College which makes things complicated and ridiculous, frankly...
    I was referring to polling over-all through the primaries and general election for all open seats... the specific polling for the presidential race wasn't as flawed as a lot of it leading up to that point.

    The Electoral College will stay in place for the foreseeable future based on it's deep roots within the Constitution for equal state representation. It helps to understand this in the context that this is the United "States" of America... not the United "Population Centers" of America.

    One of the core facets in the creation of the Constitution was rooted in equal representation by a republic of states. In order to amend the Constitution to alter some sort of equalization based on population would require ratification by 2/3rd's of the states. New York and California will never hold enough sway over the mid-section of the states to amend it... So, deal with it.

  28. #24
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    People vote their pocketbook. That comes before issues.
    Then WTF would they ever vote Republican? Statistically, Wall St. has done much better under Democratic Admins. the last 30 years...

  29. #25
    General Secretaty
    Commando
    Sgt Schultz's Avatar
    Member No
    2447
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    03-08-2024 @ 05:36 PM
    Location
    Россия
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,268
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts


    Rep Power
    22
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  30. #26
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143

    The Longest Goodbye: Why the Clintons Need to Leave the Stage

    William Rivers Pitt
    Truthout
    Published October 19, 2018



    To the great confusion of many, Bill and Hillary Clinton will embark on a multi-city speaking tour beginning one scant week after the 2018 midterm elections. They will visit seven cities together, including Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver and the immortal Wallingford, Connecticut, and will join Michelle Obama for another six engagements.

    Without a clear purpose, the Clintons’ tour has the feel of some strange roadshow zoo. Come see the politicians! Only $375 a ticket! “Attendees will have the opportunity to hear one-of-a-kind conversations with the two leaders as they tell their stories from some of the most impactful moments in modern history,” explains Live Nation, which is promoting the tour.

    Right, except when someone asks about the impeachment, Monica Lewinsky or Bill Clinton’s place in the constellation of #MeToo villains. Like as not, attendees will hear nothing of the sort; the itinerary for this journey only involves cities very friendly to the former First Family, and uncomfortable questions of any sort will probably be checked with the coats at the door.

    The Clintons, for their part, are offering no public explanation for the timing or purpose of this road trip. They aren’t promoting a book like Obama is, and the midterm campaigns will all be over.

    “Spokesmen for Bill and Hillary Clinton didn’t respond to questions about whom the ticket sales benefit,” reported the Boston Globe. “Or what, exactly, the message of the events would be. Or why the former two-term president and former secretary of state feel the need to hit the road now as a slice of the nation looks to future leaders to take on Trump.”

    Pertinent question, that last bit there.

    Thirty years after the Clintons first appeared on the national stage, the Democratic Party is in an astonishing state of disrepair. The midterm elections since 2010 have been lopsided wipeouts for the most part, with Republicans currently in control of both congressional chambers. Republicans have been running the table on state and local elections all across the country. Donald Trump is president of the United States of America, and has put a pair of far-right ideologues on the Supreme Court with the giddy help of Mitch McConnell and the Senate majority.

    Blame gerrymandering, an unfair news media, money in politics, 9/11 or the man in the moon for these serial electoral calamities. All these are chapters in this book of failure, to be sure, but the book itself was written in large part by the policies and priorities of Bill and Hillary Clinton. So long as they fashion themselves as the reigning leaders of the Democratic Party, they will own much of the responsibility for its comprehensive collapse.

    Bill Clinton was introduced to the country 30 years ago when he delivered a tragically poor opening night address to the 1988 Democratic National Convention. He became a candidate for president 27 years ago, won 26 years ago with the assistance of Ross Perot, won again outright 22 years ago and left office 18 years ago. In the intervening years, he has campaigned (grudgingly and sloppily at times) for candidates like Barack Obama, and delivered knockout convention speeches that all but erased his shabby 1988 showing. With the advent of the #MeToo movement, however, Bill Clinton has gone as dark and silent as a nuclear submarine … until this newest speaking tour.

    Hillary Clinton – First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential candidate – has arguably left a larger imprint on society than her husband over those three decades. At this point, however, her public presence is politically toxic, which is why she has also been virtually invisible during this midterm election season. Former candidates who lose to Donald Trump and poll at 36 percent don’t get invited to a lot of rallies.

    While there is ample reason to disapprove of Hillary Clinton’s politics, a significant portion of that low approval rating can also be attributed to rank misogyny. The GOP took one look at Hillary Clinton 30 years ago, perceived her as a menace to its carefully constructed social order, and marked her for destruction. The higher her aspirations grew, the more gruesome the attacks against her became.

    Hating the Clintons on a professional level has become a multi-million-dollar cottage industry. The garbage that has been thrown at Hillary Clinton over the last 30 years can only be explained by recognizing the shamelessness of her Republican enemies. From accusations that she had White House adviser Vince Foster murdered to claims she was running a pedophile ring out of a pizza shop, the bottom of the barrel has yet to be located.

    In 2001, National Review columnist John Derbyshire argued that Bill and Hillary’s daughter Chelsea should be killed because her last name is Clinton. “Chelsea is a Clinton,” he wrote. “She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law, in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored.” Derbyshire went on to favorably explain how Stalin, the Nazis and Imperial China murdered the family members of “objectionable citizens,” as he put it, often killing anyone else who happened to be nearby. “Neca eos omnes, deus suos agnoscet,” he concluded. “Let God sort ’em out.”

    Derbyshire’s appalling statement wasn’t treated as some wild firework polluting the sky. It was, in fact, hardly noted simply because it was neither new nor particularly special. For the Clintons, the Derbyshire assault was just another Thursday, and therein lies the rub.

    Hillary Clinton’s approval ratings are in the basement not because most people believe these preposterous stories, but because after 30 years a great many people are sick and tired of hearing them. Clinton’s enemies have not permanently damaged her political standing with facts, but with plodding duration. Quite simply, they wore everyone out.

    Meanwhile, along with the Republican attacks are all the things Hillary Clinton actually did do – voted for the PATRIOT Act, voted for the Iraq War, cuddled up to Wall Street, promoted fracking across the globe while Secretary of State, lost a presidential election to Donald Fa Chrissakes Trump, to name a smattering few – that have made her name a poison word to significant segments of Democratic base. The story behind those decisions is the real reason why both Clintons need to step out of the limelight and find a truly worthy endeavor, like building houses with Jimmy Carter.

    Bill and Hillary Clinton, along with the modern Democratic Party, were all created by the full-spectrum political dominance enjoyed by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. With the exception of Carter’s four years, the Republicans had claimed full ownership of the White House since 1968. Watergate blew that up for a bit, but Reagan and his far-right post-Vietnam rampage put them back on track again.

    In 1990, Bill Clinton became a founding father of the New Democrats, a genuinely cowardly movement based on the premise that the only way for Democrats to win a national election was to become more like Republicans. This involved accepting the flawed trickle-down economic premise of tax cuts and deregulation combined with massive defense spending and disdain for the social safety net. In short, Bill Clinton and his New Democrats dragged the party away from Franklin Delano Roosevelt and toward Ronald Reagan, and Hillary Clinton was right there with him.

    One of the ideas behind this generational disaster of a movement was that the Republicans would play nicer if the Democrats were more like them, and maybe then we could “get things done.” The New Democrats failed to recognize then, and continue to do so even now, that the GOP is only interested in the complete annihilation of the Democratic Party and the establishment of autocratic/theocratic one-party rule in the United States.

    You don’t try to make friends with a house fire. You douse it. Imagine a football team letting its opponent start at the 50-yard line at the beginning of every drive, or a baseball team gifting second base to every opposing batter. They are halfway to scoring before you’ve even pulled your cleats on. The “New Democrat” strategy did not make sense 30 years ago, and makes even less sense today.

    Beyond all this, there is the financial aspect of the politics. A central part of the New Democrats’ drive to be more like Republicans was, and remains, the establishment of deep ties between candidates, officeholders, the party and the worst people in the country. Wall Street brigands, petroleum barons and wealthy so-called “liberals” who only support candidates willing to preach the GOP’s “We Love Money” gospel are all welcome in the Clinton’s Democratic Party. As much as anything else the New Democrats have done, this embrace of high finance and Republican economic nonsense has damaged the entire country deeply, and perhaps permanently.

    New and exciting progressive candidates like Beto O’Rourke and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have not been invited to the fundraising banquet but managed to haul in unprecedented campaign donations anyway, another sign that the party is moving away from the failed Clinton/New Democrat model. The country is on the precipice of a potential political earthquake, with progressive candidates on the verge of securing historic victories virtually everywhere. If such a triumph is indeed secured, it will be the loudest possible signal to the Clinton faction of the party that its time has come to an end.

    The Clinton Way has been with us for 30 years. Call it fair, call it unfair, call it a tomato sandwich for all I care. The brute fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party is badly damaged, the Clintons own a large slice of responsibility for the current state of affairs, and the time has come for new faces and better ideas to emerge. This will only happen if Bill and Hillary Clinton take a bow, say their thanks and exit the political stage.

    It is my great hope that the two of them enjoy their upcoming speaking tour with quiet dignity and stay fully the hell out of the news cycle while the country digests the results of the midterm elections … and scene. They have ruled the Democratic Party roost for three decades. Their best possible final political act will be knowing when to quit.

  31. #27
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143

  32. #28
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    Then WTF would they ever vote Republican? Statistically, Wall St. has done much better under Democratic Admins. the last 30 years...
    Most people don't own stocks nor do they know anything about Wall Street. Actually finance is driven by larger cycles than politics alone. People are going to vote for who they perceive helps them financially. In the 70's the cliche was the Democrats were the blue collar party and the Republicans were the white collar party. If you lived in a town where most people belonged to a union then it tended to be Democrat. That's why the railroad and mining towns in conservative states tended to be Democrat. Then if you owned your own business or wore a suit and tie to work you were more likely to be a Republican. Not always the case but that was the cliche. It wasn't so much about issues, it was about who you thought would help you have more take home pay. Why do you think politicians lobby like hell to keep military facilities open in their district? They want to keep the jobs and that means votes for them because people vote their paycheck. Maybe in reality that facility really isn't needed but the politicians want the votes and the voters want their paychecks.

  33. #29
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94


    Hillary is the poster child of Never Give Up!

  34. #30
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Oh well. Hillary is Hillary. I don't know what is worse. A raving psychopath or watching Ted Cruz and Donald Trump suck each other's dicks. What can you say. It's politics.

  35. #31
    General Secretaty
    Commando
    Sgt Schultz's Avatar
    Member No
    2447
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    03-08-2024 @ 05:36 PM
    Location
    Россия
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,268
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts


    Rep Power
    22

  36. #32
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:40 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,064
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    3,454
    Thanked 4,562 Times in 3,449 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Schultz, the meme spam is getting really old. You're just trolling at this point and adding nothing to the conversation. We have a thread for all that, so keep the non-sequitur shit in the Political Cartoons thread...

  37. #33
    General Secretaty
    Commando
    Sgt Schultz's Avatar
    Member No
    2447
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    03-08-2024 @ 05:36 PM
    Location
    Россия
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,268
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts


    Rep Power
    22

  38. #34
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt Schultz View Post
    The only thing that will make Hillary go away is the grim reaper. As long as Hillary breathes she will be out in public making a fool of herself while she convinces herself the next presidential election is her's to win. At this point I think the Democrats will start shouting "Lock her Up!". We all want Hillary to just go away at this point.

  39. #35
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:53 AM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,703
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 3,991 Times in 3,230 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Meanwhile we got the Trump and Ted "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" fake friendship show. Just more proof politics is a partisan sport (you do what you have to do to win) and I hate to insult the great entertainment enterprise of professional wrestling by comparing it to politics but it's the same damn thing and at the end of the day it's about money. People wrestle for money. People run for office for money (or power). People vote their pocketbook and they will tolerate any schmuck as long as they get their welfare benefits, government checks, bonuses in their paycheck, the military base stays open, the government contractor gets contracts, you get your tax cuts. Whatever. Everyone votes their self interest and then points at the opposition as the problem. Maybe we need a big outside threat to scare the shit out of everyone. If we feel we need each other or we die then that's a unifier. Want to unify the US? Invent a boogie man and scare the shit out of everyone. We don't have that now. Oh we have enemies but nobody in this country can agree on who the enemy is. Maybe Trump can send David Icke out and brainwash the American public we are being invaded by reptilians and we need to be unified behind Space Force to save us. Haha! We probably will atomize into a couple of smaller states as the federal government continues to devolve into a joke people will just ignore.

  40. #36
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143

  41. #37
    Fuck this and fuck that
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    FORD's Avatar
    Member No
    32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:36 PM
    Location
    Cascadia
    Posts
    58,671
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,391
    Thanked 6,281 Times in 4,711 Posts


    Rep Power
    143

  42. #38
    General Secretaty
    Commando
    Sgt Schultz's Avatar
    Member No
    2447
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    03-08-2024 @ 05:36 PM
    Location
    Россия
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,268
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts


    Rep Power
    22

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What Hillary Clinton Really Represents
    By Satan in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-17-2016, 11:00 PM
  2. Hillary Clinton: US might have to confront Iran
    By BigBadBrian in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-26-2007, 06:11 PM
  3. Hillary Clinton: 'I'm In'
    By DrMaddVibe in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-22-2007, 05:06 PM
  4. Hillary Clinton on display at NY's Museum of Sex
    By ELVIS in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-09-2006, 09:47 PM
  5. Hillary Clinton
    By Unchainme in forum The Front Line
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-26-2005, 03:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •